Rant Sick to death of Scan RMA

See above comments

 

Whilst, in my opinion Scan is nothing like the retailer it once was (Although I'm sure the owners and their pockets don't mind) their RMA policy is pretty good.

Any time someone pops up on here complaining there is pretty much always a solid reason as to why they're not refunding/replacing.

It's epic in the shop too, well last time I went it was. Basically "Hi, this does not work." "Ok, here have another one."

 

Offering to refund the CPU within the DSR period isn't exactly optional.

The reason for the delay was because I initially used it with 1600MHz memory and didn't realise there was an issue.

If you're unwilling to accept that my tests indicate a problem, then perhaps compromise with a refund minus 10% of the cost I paid. It was returned to you in the same condition I received it and with the cooler unused, and if you're absolutely content that it's not faulty it can be resold as open box.

 

Or just chuck it back into stock and forget about it. I have had a few instances with brand new stock purchased from scan have obviously been returns...stickers missing, dust on pcb etc. If scan weren't so close to my house I would shop elsewhere I'm afraid.

 

I'd also add that in the same order as this APU the case I received was faulty (the IO connectors didn't work), but instead of returning it for a refund or replacement, I dealt with the manufacturer directly and fitted a replacement part they sent myself, thus costing Scan no time or money to deal with it. It would have been quicker for me to get a refund and order a replacement. That in itself I would have thought would have shown good will on my part.

 

Not trying to rain on your parade, but the case issue isn't really relevant here. If you've not given Scan a chance to fix a problem, you can't really use that as a bargaining chip later, can you?

 

Sure, but let this one go (you don't need to publicise that you'll bend the rules and make an exception every now and then) and maybe you'll get plenty more orders from a customer over the next few years which will more than make up for taking a tiny hit now; versus none at all in the future. Just a thought

Although, teppic, if you've had to threaten legal action before what are you still doing shopping with scan?

 

Quite funny that you are actually suggesting we restock a clearly opened used part to some other unsuspecting customer, can I reference this thread when they complain?

Whilst I'm not suggesting this doesn't happen by mistake from time to time where opened stuff gets restocked as new these instances are very few and far between.

 

It is when the DSR's allow you to open and inspect the goods as you would in a shop, i'd hardly think the shop would let you test the CPU for a week on the shop floor before deciding if you want to keep it or not.

 

I'd seen quite a few complaints about RMAs around the same time. I later thought I'd give it another go with them. It riled me somewhat (to put it lightly) to be told by Scan on this thread I was satisfied with their service, when they had completely ignored all attempts at communication until I started the formalities for legal action.

 

Pretty sure that we sorted this on your behalf.

You make it sound like you didn't notify us of a problem with the case and you contacted the manufacturer yourself when infact you did and we sorted this for you.

We could have just as easily collected and refunded if you wanted to order a replacement, after all you get free shipping through being a member of these lovely forums but that would seem a little silly given they could just send you the replacement part and you can dispose of the faulty part.

 

A business won't last long turning new stock into used stock and the testing staff were being paid when they could have been working on something else.

I guess the mistake seems to have been with the customer.

 

If you want to refuse DSR returns because you think people have tested them for too long within the allowed period, that's another issue.

You haven't responded to my attempt to compromise?

As for the case, I contacted the manufacturer myself at the same time as you, and then they dealt with me directly. My point was that it would have meant you picking up the case and testing it as well as sending out a replacement and returning the faulty one to your supplier, which was entirely avoided.

 

Why, because teppic is essentially trying to blackmail them into accepting a refund by bringing this to such a large audience?

 

we'll have to agree to disagree on that one, as I'm sure most people will agree both the SOGA and the DSR's are very much open to interpretation but I would suggest having a read of the following for a detailed explanation on what the DSR's are actually for:

http://dshub.tradingstandards.gov.uk/dsrexplained

I'll be happy to waive the testing fee on this occasion as a gesture of goodwill despite the extra testing carried out with the CPU.

However the courier collection and return fee will stand.

 

How on earth is this blackmail? It's a rant at being charged fees for the return of something I have not been able to get working on multiple pieces of hardware. Having it returned back to me won't make it work on them. As I said, at what point do the tests indicate a problem? Working on one particular set of hardware and not working on ten others? 100 others?

I've suggested a reduced refund because I am far beyond frustrated at all of this, not because I want to 'blackmail' a company.

 

But why should they?

In my opinion they don't even look bad - they did tell the customer about the charges that could potentially happen if he was to persue an RMA, which he did.

They have then, at the request of the customer gone above and beyond by doing additional testing to see if they could get it to fail in the same manner it did for OP.

Why should they not charge the customer when their engineers have been testing a product that they test to work as it says it should on the box?

I get it that there have been a few instances where maybe scan have seemed to not act in the customers best interest, or there are instances of maybe bad customer service - same can be said for most business', however, this isn't one of those instances and it shouldn't be painted as one. It's just a bad circumstance, end of.

 

Yeah definitely - they'd make more £ in the long run by keeping a customer, even if the customer might be wrong, depending on how you want to look at it.

Anyway, mind the doors; I can't see much else coming out of this thread